WHY DOESN'T THIS WORK?

by Duns Scotus

Above is a typical "Dissident Right" meme. The message is clear: The top panel is the "bad thing." The bottom panel is the "good thing." The juxtaposition is supposed to highlight the hollowness of the "globohomo" talking point included in the meme.

But is it working? Does this kind of message make a difference?

Let's take a quick look at the latest fertility figures to find out: 

Well, apparently not. The question thus becomes: "Why not?"

It is clear to anyone that the bottom option is better in many ways and certainly healthier from a civilisational point of view (although it should also be noted that the birth rate in the bottom panel is still only one kid per woman and that the mother shown there hasn't had another kid for at least 5 or 6 years).

But why do people in the modern West keep choosing the top panel at a significant enough rate to drag down our societies and make them dependent on continuous mass immigration from the Third World?

The first point is that the meme is disingenuous and deceitful. It over-simplifies reality by showing an easy choice (doing nothing important on a day-to-day basis) with a difficult choice (finding the right person, getting them to "find" you, and then committing to each other long term).

The choice here is essentially that between whistling a cheery melody and playing a piece of Rachmaninov on the piano. One is clearly more difficult than the other.

But the real problem is deeper. The meme sells the "happy family" idea in the bottom panel on the basis that it makes people happier. HAPPINESS therefore becomes the nexus of decision-making. If it makes you happy, it's good. If it doesn't make you happy, it's bad.

There is an immediate problem here because playing Rachmaninov will involve countless hours of practice and suffering; whistling a tune not so much. Finding the right "life partner" and successfully starting and supporting a family will also involve struggle, hard work, and sacrifice (unless you choose to do it on welfare with someone suitable from that particular demographic).

But there is more. The meme we are discussing here doesn't directly allude to the other unchallenged value at work here, namely FREEDOM, but it hints at it and endorses it.

The woman in the top panel of the meme is enmeshed in her dysfunctional life and cooped up in her lonely room, while the couple in the bottom panel are "freely" exploring the wonders of nature. But freedom is all about second-to-second choices, something the unmarried woman in the top panel has in plenty, while the couple in the bottom panel are essentially prisoners of their more structured and responsible lives. Also, most marriages, from what I hear, are rather cantankerous and difficult affairs with many ending in divorce. Freedom they are not.

It should also be added that our consumerist business model unwittingly -- but pervasively and irresistibly -- reinforces  that second-to-second type of "freedom" in pursuit of transient and unearned "happiness," while undermining social systems based on the denial of such freedom. 

From this brief analysis, therefore, it should be clear then why many Dissident Right memes, takes, and arguments essentially go nowhere. It is because they are infected with the values of the very things they are attempting to critique and are therefore riven with contradictions. They are thus only good for signalling minor dissatisfaction with a system they are powerless to change and which they unwittingly endorse.

Here, feel that cheap glow again and reflect on how similar it is to pornography or stormertardery: 

Choice is actually the problem.